[youtube]BoXQf2f2Yxo[/youtube]

I get that.

Hard to fault any of that.

Yeah I've never heard the modern condition of males in our modern culture articulated so well.

That's the change in society. On the other side of the largely failed experiment in feminism is the thousands of women who want a kid and will pass childbearing age without conceiving with a partner. All whilst being force fed a diet of sexualisation and vapid intellect in our media.

One weeps at the future.

Too simplistic a view imo.

The pressures to marry are certainly far less nowadays. I don't know of any of my friends (or anyone really) who have expressed that they have not got married because they may divorce and have to pay child support. They haven't got married because their families (parents) no longer expect them too before having children etc...

I'd like a deeper exploration of why men are opting out of study and work... that would be a much more interesting conversation.

Re: Study. I think a lot of people are forced to make ends meet short term and thus can't afford to study.

Nothing but a way to sell books to the disenfranchised wrapped up in a highly consumable package for news media. Ultimately the majority of these reasons given for men suddenly rejecting marriage have existed far longer than the downward trend. The real contributing factor is society not placing as much value on marriage as it used to. Declining belief in religion amongst young adults and increasingly liberal social views reduce the appeal of traditional societal norms such as marriage. The opinion has shifted from "I need to get married so I can complete my life" to "I don't need to be married to be complete, I may marry someone if I am one day involved with someone I know I will love forever but my life can be full and complete without it."

Add on to that an increasing acceptance of polyamory and the traditional concept of a family unit is losing its weight. Marriage is about tying two people together at the exclusion of others- an increasing number of modern relationships are open (where one or both partners incorporate others into their sexual activities in full knowledge of their partner.) There is little necessity for marriage in this sort of relationship, you can still be life partners and raise children with decreasing amounts of stigma.


You have very little understanding about feminism and what it stands for, don't you? Feminism isn't an experiment, it is a societal reaction to gender-based discrimination. And yes, that includes the imbalance in the courts when it comes to alimony and child support. This disparity in the legal system all stems from the archaic idea that the man is the breadwinner and the woman the home-maker and carer. Feminists don't want women to come out on top, they want to bring everything back to the middle.

Feminism also empowers women to be able to have (or not have) children as they want regardless of the socially-dictated concept of when they should (ie: feminism rejects the idea that you must be married to have children (or that you must have children at all), and posits that a woman sufficiently able to care for a child can do so regardless of her relationship status.)

So your belief that feminism has somehow caused an increase in women who want but do not have children is actually a fallacy- feminism reduces this subset of women! It is patriarchal society dictating the conditions under which motherhood is acceptable that prevents the hypothetical women you speak of from having their hypothetical children and it is patriarchal society that packages women for the male gaze (hyper-sexualised and objectified.) That is why feminism is important!

Scholl, get your panties untwisted.

Correct the following;

Are more women now childless in their 30's and 40's, and is there a sense of regret being aired in feedback and literature?
Have things like dating being replaced with hyper-sexual aps like Tinder?
Are girls being forced into crazy situations like those of Miley Cyrus stripping instead of singing? Sexting?


Yep, Feminism is a great success.

Absolute rubbish. Feminism is about women wanting all the privileges men have (real or imagined) without the responsibility. Feminists could not give a fuck about equality. You only have to look at the double standards they apply to men and women to see this. Feminism has made the world a worse place for everybody- men, women and children. It is based in marxism, with the ultimate goal of destroying capitalism via erosion of the family unit.

Edited by Captain Haddock: 3/12/2013 04:51:13 PM

Spot on!

:lol: at you lecturing about feminism when your source material is your own skewed perception.

It is the straight-up mission statement of modern feminism to pursue equal rights. That is no opinion, it is fact. Feel free to take some gender studies classes if you want to challenge what feminism stands for, it might enlighten you a bit. Feminists do not shirk responsibility, they embrace it by necessity.

There is a natural urge to recoil when you are told you are privileged, a sense of "but I don't have it good, look at all the things society does not give me. I shouldn't feel guilty about others when I am a victim!" Truth is though, if you are male you have a distinct advantage in life. Doubly so if you are white. Ramp it up a lot more if you are from a middle-class or higher family.

Anyone with a moral compass looking objectively at gender roles in our society will see the inequity and want to do something about it. A hyper-masculine sporting forum such as this does not make a cosy breeding ground for this sort of awareness- sport is a traditionally male domain and self-perpetuates inherent masculine norms (you can observe this through the gender divide amongst users)- but that doesn't mean I shouldn't try and offer a competing world view.

I am a vastly privileged person. White, male, straight, young, educated, a professional and from a reasonably well off family. Instead of fearing losing the leg-ups society gives me by virtue of birth and nature I embrace the challenge of fixing what I see as a flawed system. If I can get even one person on this forum to re-assess their views on equality then it is all worth it, even if the vast majority shrink back into their shells in defence of their perceived rights (or worse, attempt to attack me for having the gall to suggest they own privilege.)

Your last line leads me to believe you are trolling, you sound like a '60s "beware the red menace" scaremonger :lol: The merits of capitalism as the one true solution to economic systems is another matter altogether, and has absolutely nothing to do with the family unit.

Excellent retort sir, I have certainly been put in my place.


Well, the burden of proof is on you. Feel free to provide some peer-reviewed studies that indicate women are becoming increasingly childless into their 30's and 40's. I'm sure that may be the case, but the bonus points come in if they correlate to being against their wishes. Choosing to put off motherhood until you are ready/want to be a mother is absolutely a good thing.


Again, provide examples rather than opinion. Bear in mind that mass media is a male-dominated medium with an interest in reinforcing gender roles. If you get your views on feminism from Murdoch's media empire, let's just say that's like getting your opinions on the A-League from Mr. Demitriou.


Geez, I miss the days of being able to meet people on my Amstrad. Oh wait.

Have you considered that sexual freedom may be a by-product of increased access to anonymous communication? There have always been ways to satisfy base desires, technology just makes it quicker and easier. This isn't feminism's fault (nor is it necessarily a bad thing! I am pro being as sexual or asexual as you want to be!)


Yes. Do you know why? Not feminism; patriarchal society. You are describing 'male gaze', where women are objectified to appeal to men. This is the sort of thing that feminism tries to bring to light. No-one should have to use their body to sell themselves (though they should be free to choose to- this is hard though as your choices are formed partially subconsciously and it is difficult to determine what role societal influence has on this process.)

Miley Cyrus is actually arguably feminist in her self portrayal recently- she has gone so extreme that she has become a parody of what the industry wants a woman to be. I personally think she is a bit naive in her implementation if so, but she certainly does get people talking about women in the entertainment industry. I think that is a step in the right direction, if only she had a little more wisdom and confidence behind her to back up her actions with a dismantling of her industry's attitude towards women.


Again, being pressured by males to do something they don't necessarily want to do is not a problem with feminism but a sign that feminism is still important.

And again, there is nothing wrong with sexting if it has informed consent.


Feminism hasn't failed in any way, and by virtue of still existing one can argue that it is in some measure successful. If society stopped caring about fighting for women's rights, I can guarantee things would be a whole lot worse.

Because a mission statement accurately represents the mindset of everyone who believes in a cause...

Would it not be fair to say that the focus should shift from the old hairy armpit Germaine Greer school of thought to a more egalitarian branding?

Can't argue with that.

Ah, ok. It is understandable that you have a negative view on feminism if you think that it hasn't evolved in the last half century (not an insult! it is legitimately a misconception people have!)

Modern feminism is exactly what you are saying you feel it should be shifting to, however it is mired in the stigma of old-school fundamentalist feminism (which was actually only a niche- the best comparison is the hardcore ultraz that rip flares. They are the overwhelming minority but the most vocal and most off-putting to the neutral observer.) So-called radical feminists do exist, however mainstream feminists do not believe they strictly adhere to feminist ideology.

As an addendum, I firmly believe people should have as much or as little body hair as they want without being subjected to social stigma :P

What people think Feminism is: Women = men.
What Feminism actually is: Women > men.
What people actually want: Gender Equality.

/argument

This!

Re OP: true. No faulting that. Could've expanded.

What people think feminism is: Women > Men
What feminism actually is: Women = Men
What people actually want: Feminism, they just don't know it is called that.

You can't spew bullshit and call the end to an argument Afro. You have no experience in feminism (and your behaviour in the relationships thread more than demonstrates that you objectify women, and are thus not a valid source of information on gender relations.) If you honestly think what you said is correct, take some gender studies units (or heck, email a gender studies lecturer)- you will be surprised.

I'll just leave this here...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Germaine_Greer

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

All gender studies teaches is that while males are the root of all evil, and that they should check their privilege.

Scoll, white males are not more privileged than females. Take off your blue-pilled leftist glasses and you'll see that females have many more tangible leg-ups in society than males.

So do ethnic minorities,for that matter.

Why males are surplus to requirements, by Germaine Greer, one of the faces of the Feminist movement.

Yeah, good argument Scoll.

Uh oh here comes a racism thread.

Australia is racist, everyone else is suffering, plight etc.

:lol: you are so naive it is almost pitiful. It would be fantastic if we had the technology to live in other peoples shoes for a short period of time- you could do with it.

Germaine Greer says a lot of things that aren't feminist. She is pretty loopy. If I were to say that Davis_Partik was every member of this forum would be akin to the claims you are making.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender_pay_gap_in_Australia

Women in full time positions get paid 17% less than men in Australia. 24% in WA. Tell me again how disadvantaged men are.

Women in hospitality are paid in excess of 20% more than their male counterparts. Tell me again how disadvantaged women are.

*shakes head* you can't honestly think that is a good argument, can you? Picking an underpaid industry that has a skewed workforce. So yes, you are spewing garbage. You can't counter national figures with a subset from a disadvantaged industry.

You, a white male, is lecturing me on the plight of women while also telling me to have empathy? If you've never lived in their shoes, how could you possibly know their plight?

left-tards :roll:

Ok, you want hard statistics? Here's why men get paid more:
There's absolutely 0% chance of men getting pregnant.
And Women take more sick days

Firstly, an apology for my behaviour in some of my posts. I am quite passionate about equality (gender, racial, sexual and religious) and arced up a little at a few of you being genuinely confrontational with your anti-feminist opinions. That is not a good way to encourage dialogue and I own my part of the fault in that. I will endeavor to be a little more level headed.


How can change be made if we don't recognise the need for it? I see disadvantage, so I don't need to find empathy. I was suggesting that if you can't see the inequality that you need more exposure to it. Probably a bit dismissive of your feelings, apologies if I offended you- I will refrain from attacking you personally. I would appreciate if you extend a similar courtesy and refrain from personal attacks on my ideological alignments. If you are happy with this I am more than happy to discuss anything you see as a problem with feminism.


So women should be paid less, despite being equally capable, because they have a baby put in them by a man? (also, I thought women weren't having babies before their 40's now according to the first page of this thread :P)

Our leave system is patriarchal and reinforces inequality- In Sweden each child entitles the parents to 480 days of parental leave to be divided as the parents wish. This is far more equitable, and a shining example of gender equality. Our system reinforces the "men earn the money, women make the home" ideology. This ensures women aren't equal in the workforce.

Should I carry this into a thread about feminism? I am happy to do a Q and A and dialogue about what it means to be feminist if people are genuinely open to it and aren't going to be aggressively dismissive.

And until men can get pregnant and carry a baby to term it will stay that way.

Obviously women are not 'equally capable' if they're taking more sick days and thus being more of a liability.

At least spell it correctly.

Feminism is the result of men treating women like they are nothing, devaluing them to nothing. It is also a result of the overvaluing of money and the power that it gives to those who have it.

Women take no more sick days than they are entitled, me have access to these as well. This doesn't reflect on capability to perform the job at all. It reflects on the expectation society has for men to toughen up (to their physical detriment) and for women to look after the children (you will find that in most industries carer's leave falls under personal leave- and thus shares statistics with sick leave. Women are expected to perform the carers role.) This isn't equitable, and whilst there are some male issues it on the balance of it all prevents women from attaining equality in the workplace. Which brings me back to 'out leave system is inherently patriarchal and flawed'

Men don't need to get pregnant to instate equality in parental responsibilities and reap the flow-on benefits of equality in the workplace. Sweden is an example of a country getting it right (and their system was introduced in the 70s!) and it's no surprise that as a result they have a far better record on workplace gender equality (and overall gender equality.)

Out of interest, do you actually believe women are inferior to (less capable than) men professionally, and if so what leads you to this conclusion?

Noted, no offence intended btw- I just knew you were someone Afro had run-ins with and as such a good example of someone he wouldn't want representing him as a member of the forum.

What people are entitled to by law doesn't mean that it isn't costly and/or a liability for the business. Both pregnancy and sick days are to the detriment of the employer from a financial and business perspective. Little wonder they aren't as willing to invest as much money when they get a subsequent inferior return.

Not offended, just joking about it. And I am loopy by societies standards, I think sex outside marriage is wrong and I hate Christmas. I am also not that in favor of feminism.

Scoll, I admire your striving for equality but the best we can do is equality of choices. Women and men are biologically different and to attempt to equate them is to fly in the face of nature.

Without a doubt though, if men and women are receiving different rates of pay for the same work that needs to be righted.

Edited by thupercoach: 4/12/2013 03:42:03 AM

The term you are looking for is Mangina White Knight.

Edited by Captain Haddock: 4/12/2013 12:48:39 PM

Which is why feminism is necessary, to reduce the burden of expectation on women to have to be the parent that takes all the leave and remove workplace inequality. It is not a case of just make men take the same amount of leave as women currently need to, but to divide the accepted amount that society deems necessary for raising a child at the early stages of life and assign it over both parents. The parents can then decide who takes what ratio of the leave (Swedish law preserves the right of each parent to a minimum of 60 days for themselves) which allows both parents to bond with the child and effectively keep working part time if desired (which helps business due to less training and hiring/secondment required)

(By the way, the actual state of being pregnant barely affects the amount of time a woman works. The leave cost is post-delivery, and there is only a traditional IR structure preventing that being equal.)

You seem to be suggesting that workplace inequality exists because women don't have equality in the workplace (the burden is on them to take parental leave, carers leave, there is a stigma against hiring women in case they get pregnant- whether that is something they want or not.) I completely agree that things aren't equal, they do not need to be inequitable however. There are modern sociological examples where women aren't a greater risk to employers due to more equitable IR laws. This is better for business, and better for people. This is what feminism wants- not to hire women because they are women and its "not fair" not to, but to ultimately remove socially obsolete barriers of inequality that prevent women from being as employable.


Yes, men and women are biologically different. That doesn't mean women should be objectified in the media, or have barriers against their ability to climb the professional ladder, or be judged for how sexual they are or aren't, or be held responsible for being assaulted due to what they are wearing, or what they drank, or where they were. Nor should we dictate how they should dress, how much makeup they should wear, how much of their hair they shave or do not shave. Equality doesn't just refer to being the exact same as one another, it is not allowing society to dictate an advantage for one side to the detriment of another for the purpose of reinforcing tradition.


Hey, to each their own. If you value marriage on its literal meaning then the concept of pre-marital sex being immoral is more than understandable. I personally don't put value on mono-amory or the common accepted understanding of marriage so I don't have a problem with it. Why aren't you in favour of feminisim?


The very fact you feel the need to liken me to a woman to belittle my opinions is a shining example of how sexism is alive and well in modern society. Thank you :)

Has there been any posts about why men are avoiding marriage yet?

Do any young forumers here see themselves getting married any time soon? Why/why not?

No, because I actually need a girlfriend first.

I do know of a few people who have been/are engaged. I recently reconnected with my best friend from primary school. He's 19 now and got married to his girlfriend of 3 and a half years (who's also 19) about three weeks ago. Crazy.

The head girl from my year at school is engaged, and she's getting married early next year, her and her bf have only been together a couple of years. A girl in the year above me got engaged last week to another guy from school after about a year and a half together. He's a few years older, great guy and I was speaking to him the other day at athletics and he said they're holding off until 2015 to get married. Also know my best friend's ball date got married earlier this year to his gf of one and a half years, both of them are only a year older than me.

Interesting to note, all those couples are religious. I don't know if the decision is influenced by the guy wanting to have sex (which I hope not, it's probably not a factor in the 2nd case because i know what the guy is like), or if now they're 18 they can do it, or whatever.

I don't know any non-religious couples who are married or engaged. One of my athletics mates, who was 20 at the time, proposed to his 17 year old girlfriend of 9 months last year, which everyone was shocked by. I think they were planning on a long engagement, but she ended it when she cheated on him with his friend. Prsonally, i think they were too young to be married and hadn't known each other long enough, so it was good in a way, but at the same time I felt sorry for him and haven't forgiven her yet and I doubt I ever will.

My best mate has been going out with his girlfriend for roughly 18 months now, and they're pretty much perfect together. He could propose now and she'd say yes, however, they've talked about it marriage and discussed it, and they both agree they're too young (interestingly, non-religious). He's told me he'll wait until they graduate from uni (another three years) and have jobs (which apparently shouldn't be too hard, considering they're two of Murdoch Uni's top law students) and then he'll propose.

Tl;dr The only couples I know who are engaged and around my age are religious.

Getting married in June 2014. I'm a 25 yr old so I guess 'young'?

Well I see no reason not to get married. Not sure I would say the any of my mates in a defacto relationship are happier than my married mates. In fact it is overwhelmingly the other way around.

There is also the issue that in both of our families, defacto relationships are not looked upon very well. (Protestant families)

Also she is well out of my league in general so I decided best to make it as difficult as possible for her to leave

In all seriousness, if you find the right woman there should be no reason for loss of freedom or poor sex life. These are things you should be working on together in a healthy relationship

I sell engagement rings!

/plug.

:p

Sorry that's bullshit. The amount of pregnant women I've had to give extra sick leave to would shock you. Furthermore, having assisted in running a small business that had 4 different bouts of mat leave over 12 months, I can tell you the cost is enormous.

Forget structure. If you have to pay someone who is of no immediate use to you then they are a liability.

You aren't giving them any more sick leave than they are entitled to though, right? The same leave that men also have access to.

As someone who has acted as a manager, surely you understand the benefit of enabling your core workforce to remain at work as much as possible. It is far better to have an employee at 0.5FTE than 0.0FTE, which IR reform can achieve.

You are focused on women being a liability, when they don't have to be.

You bet we do. I currently work for a not-for-profit. We have the unions up our arse constantly about affording women compassionate sick days due to 'unavoidable biological difference'. I fucking kid you not, a rep has said that to my face

I'm a bit of realist mate. Unfortunately, if there is an added cost/risk I will find a cheaper/more cost effective option. I really wish it were a different way but women make their choices. Why can't I be given Pat leave so that my SO can immediately return to work and I take primary care of the child. Men get laughed out the door for that... When society meets half way, I might be a little more forgiving

\
Men can't get pregnant. Equality in the work place out the window.

I would love too. Problem is women are head fucks. I blame the pill tbh. Completely irrational and random at the best of times and overly moody and depressed. Blessed the man who can handle it but long term relationships are my goal. I don't really see the point in short term flings and what not. You're pretty much giving yourself away.

Problem for guys like me is that women are much more keen to sleep around. Wish it was different but we are facing a different problem to what we have faced in previous decades.

Fuck feminism.

That's what we want! You may not realise it, but that right there is you expressing a feminist value :) It seems counter-intuitive to think affording men a right is actually forwarding women's rights, but it is; it is all about breaking apart the systemic boundaries that make women second-class. Inequitable leave is one such boundary. We are often too focused on the "perks" that are given to women than the reasons why they are deemed necessary. The more obvious ones (eg: quotas) are practically just clumsy means by which to level the playing field- kind of like austerity in Greece- and are actually against feminist principles (plus arguably harmful.)

I don't judge you for feeling that women are a burden on your business, I would just like you to be aware that it is not necessarily a biological factor that causes this. There are man-made (pun not intended) barriers that reinforce the gender divide. Feminism doesn't say "hey, to hell with men, give women all the power and benefits" (contrary to what a small but vocal group of misogynist organisations would have you believe). Feminism says "Hey, something isn't quite right with the way we do things, could it be better? How can we make it better?"

Anecdotally, I have worked for large (including one of the largest workforces in my state) and small businesses and none have had the issues you are describing with pregnant staff taking excessive leave. I'd be interested to know whether your business is an outlier, or whether it is symptomatic of your industry, or socio-economic area, or any other factor. I don't deny your experience, it just seems contrary to mine and I wonder if there is an underlying reason for that.

Afro we have been around this several times, if you persist in just being a brick wall you offer nothing to the dialogue and should remove yourself from the conversation.

Sweden has proven that an equitable parental leave system promotes equality in the workforce. It does not matter that the man does not get pregnant; by giving both the same scope to care for the infant, equality in the workforce is achieved. Women are able to keep working rather than being a "burden" on the system.

What evidence do you have that women are more keen to sleep around? The last studies I have seen had men with an average ranging from 9 (UK, 2011) to 24 (Durex- worldwide, 2008) sexual partners and women with 4 (UK) to 13 (Durex.) The decreasing stigma placed on sexuality has seen female promiscuity anecdotally on the rise, but all studies I have seen place men as the more promiscuous gender.

It is also problematic that you label all women as head fucks, negative stereotyping is harmful- whilst some people of both genders have mental health issues, and women certainly have hormonal cycles, your average woman is stable. I can guarantee that even the most stable person is going to get pissed off at being called a head fuck by someone who doesn't know them though.

Why fuck feminism? What do you perceive as bad about it?

This is why I need feminism.

You can't throw up a single nation as the evidence that it's feasible. That's called an outlier.

The fact is, women take more sick leave - not maternity leave, not family leave, not any other leave - sick leave. And because they're 100% more likely to get pregnant, this makes for more of a liability.

Someone has to be the first to enact positive change. Marriage equality has finally reached majority support amongst the voting public, giving a voice to change. But should we just continue mired in the old ways because only a few outliers allow equal marriage?

Sweden isn't the only country, they are just the best. The entire Scandinavian region is utterly fantastic for workplace equality. By the same token, Australia isn't the worst- but this isn't a zero sum game and it is still fine to recognise and try to change flaws in our system whilst fighting for those worse off abroad.

Please post statistics on sick leave rather than just claiming it as gospel truth. Ignoring your comment on who gets pregnant as it ties into my argument above regarding Sweden/Scandinavia.

I know I'm not going to change your mind, you are notorious for sticking to what you perceive as true, but hopefully this helps a less vocal visitor to the thread consider other ideas.


Edited by Scoll: 4/12/2013 06:19:59 PM

Yet your premise that women take more sick leave is based on a representative study of 1,000 men and 1,000 women from just England?

I also think you're misusing the term outlier, unless it's been proven unfeasible elsewhere its simply a pioneer of sorts.

I always wanted to get married young and have kids quickly, until about 18 months ago. Now the idea horrifies me.

I can't even find a girl for a serious relationship, let alone marriage :lol: I find I get cold feet very quickly these days, and I can't work out what changed, but one date/night out is usually enough for me to find a deal breaker.

Data from Finland from 2002-05

Fair enough, there's some interesting analysis of that data too



and relating to the patriarchal society Scoll mentioned previously



from here

You need feminism to pick one of two costumes?

Nice try! :lol:

Yea thats about right

Scoll you sound like you've had your brain rotted by taking too many gender studies course.

I've dealt with people- men mainly- who work for the Family Court and they are the biggest anti-father, anti-nuclear family c***ts there are.

All with many units in "gender studies".

My advice to anyone confronted with a male employee in Family Court's Mediation services dispute is to have the pr**k removed from your case ASAP.

I work for an employee which has won numerous awards for employing women. In fact 15 years ago they had an unwritten policy of NOT hiring males, even if they were better qualified.

15 years later we have a management crisis because too few females want management responsibility, or the hours, or the additional training required to earn promotion. Oh and guess who's leave applications get knocked back..it aint the Ms's of our business.

I've read that in Sweden there is growing anger about exactly where feminism has led men.

We will have equality when the contribution of men to family and society is appreciated by feminism.

Many of the things women enjoy just would not happen if it wasn't for men.

Its men that pay off most of the family mortgage, its men that pay most of the taxes which goes towards paying for the building, transportation, roads, hospitals, its men that do the dirty, dangerous, physical jobs, its men that offer physical protection to women and children at the home, and in war.

Its well and good to bleat on about how hard women have because they have to put a bowl of cereal in front of the kids each morning, drive the 4wd 15 mins to school, have coffee with the girls, then cook a crappy meal in the evening and the odd vacuum and put out a load of washing or dishwasher.

OTOH its mostly men that end up paying for the roof over their heads, the food on their plate, the clothes on their back, the holidays, the full-maintained car, health insurance etc. Yes-its STILL this way, and it conforms what everyone except for you seems to know: Feminism is their to make men subservient and to give women freedom to do whatever they wnat to be "happy" whatever "happy" means this month.

And on divorce, the wife automagically starts at 50% share, and gets a 15% addition per kid.

Equality? Really!!

I've taken zero, I am capable of empathy and reasoned observation of our current society. I suggest visiting gender studies classes as I have seen people have their eyes opened by how they aren't all man-haters and how institutionalised sexism is still very present.

What are your examples of family court practitioners, and evidence that they have taken gender studies? The family court is most definitely broken, and it is because it is patriarchal. The irony is that this severely disadvantages men. Part of wanting equality is also wanting the courts to realise that care shouldn't default to the mother, and the father shouldn't be seen as the breadwinner.


Your employer's alleged unwritten policy is inherently sexist, and costs the business whilst being patronising towards women. If a business is truly equal opportunity, it will attract and hire capable women. By hiring to look good, they leave themselves open to hiring workers who have poor work ethic and no desire to seek promotion (and these types of worker are equally male when you consider the workforce as a whole, you will get skewed numbers if you hire one gender however.)

If legitimate leave requests are being knocked back based on gender, that is sexism and feminists oppose this. A lot of these problems stem from seeing women wanting to be seen as equals as a "problem" that you can just apply a patch to and everything is rosy. The women aren't the problem, the system is.


Everyone understands why yes doesn't always mean yes, right?

Just in case: consent cannot be given if the person is of unsound mind (through temporary inebriation or through a disability) or not capable of giving consent (ie: a minor). "She said yes" has been used as a defence to rape in those situations before (and can quite often be successful in the first case! It is very hard to prosecute rape :()

Have you considered why men have a burden of financial expectation?

They get paid more, they traditionally get the better jobs, society and media reinforce the stereotype that boys need to grow up to be a professional and women need to grow up to find a man and have kids.

You can't say "we can't have equality because we don't have equality".

Equality is enabling men to do those things you deem luxuries by giving women the opportunity to pursue the things men are expected to do but have been traditionally denied of women. We are gradually creeping towards it but we can't just throw up our arms and say "this is bullshit, it doesn't work."

Please read your post again, and try and put yourself in the shoes of a woman who wants to contribute to society outside of the home, and think about how you would feel if someone said that to you.

Feminism is not about making men subservient. It is deeply saddening that you have such a negative view of women that you believe that.

Scoll, do you think it is harder to be the money maker of the family or simple raising the children and looking after the husband? Women have it far easier in society, there are tangible incentives to get them employed, and they are benefited by a patriarchal judicial system.

The only place women really have a right to complain are shitholes like the Middle-East.

Do you think women should not be allowed to be the money maker?

Do you think women are inferior to men?

Do you think women as a whole want to be home-makers?

There are incentives to patriarchal institutions to hire women because there exists a traditional belief that they do not belong in the workforce, despite modern understanding that they are equally capable given the same opportunities.

Is it right for a man of colour to not be allowed to sit where he wants on the bus because he doesn't live 1000 miles southwest where he is liable to be lynched?

Is it therefore right to limit a woman's ability to work where she pleases because 15,000km away women aren't allowed to work at all?

It isn't actually easier to be a women in our society, but that doesn't mean it is actually easy to be a man. The grass is always greener, but when you have to constantly deal with social pressures about maintaing an accepted level of beauty, with ingrained bias at work (and as evidenced here, in society), with a lack of respect for your opinions, with an expectation to go through (the rather excruciating act of) childbirth as soon as possible ON TOP of trying to earn a living, get an education and maintain your family and social circles- which are burdens in themselves.

I'm not saying being born a man guarantees you a gold ticket to a fantastic, whirlwind orgy of a super-awesome life. It does give you advantages in our society though. You may still end up with shit on a stick, life sucks some times (and for some people, a lot of the time.)

All this debate is making me hungry but thanks to feminism I have to make my own damn sandwich ffs

Well, this technically means I've been raped multiple times... :lol:

1) Men also have to maintain an accepted level of beauty.
2) The bias at work is not "ingrained", I have witnessed it first hand and from storys from family members.
3) I respect women's opinions, speak for yourself.
4) No one expects women to go through childbirth as soon as possible.
5) Men also try to earn a living.
6) Men also try and get an education
7) Men also try and maintain a family.
8) Men also try and maintain social circles.

But because they're women, they should not have to deal with problems men do right?

Men have beauty standards, but aren't punished as harshly for not attaining them. Having a rough face or a gut as a man damages your potential far less than as a woman. Plus, it is perfectly acceptable for a man to shave as much or as little of his body as he likes, whereas women are expected to remove body hair or be labelled ugly. Men can wear clothes that disguise their figure without being called frumpy. Men can wear thongs outside the beach/pool without being labelled white trash.

There is absolutely no way that men have it anywhere near as bad as women when it comes to expectations of beauty.


You know what ingrained means, right? It means established, deep rooted. There is an ingrained bias against women in the business world. Society has acknowledged this and attempted to weed it out, but the job isn't done.


You have emphatically shown that you have no respect for women.


Sorry, but society does. As soon as women are in a committed relationship the questions begin from family, extended family, friends and strangers: "So, when are you planning on having a baby then?"


There are two classic Simpsons moments that sum this up, one with Homer making the "whoosh" over his head and the other Rainier Wolfcastle dead-panning at the comedy night "Dat's the joke"

Women have to deal with the same issues as men on top of unrealistic societal expectation.

Sexual assault is a murky area, and I'm not going to open another can of worms here after unleashing the whole anti-feminism brigade on me (:P), but it is actually plausible! Not necessarily true that you were, but if someone took advantage of you in an intoxicated state then yeah- you may have been sexually assaulted :)

Maintaining hygiene, a basic standard of beauty, having a baby at some point in their lives (Which is the womens job) in considered "unrealistic". ](*,)



"Disagreeing with me means that you just hate women!"

Edited by 433: 5/12/2013 08:52:48 PM

Mainly religious based reasons.

@Scoll.

Most of the issue that feminists describe as discrimination originate in one inescapable fact: Life when its all said and done is about reproduction, and the facts of human reproduction is that women have babies.

Women make themselves look physically attractive- and by attractive we really mean fit and healthy looking from the point of being a good selection to have sex with and ultimately as a mother

Men makes themselves look attractive as a mate by appearing physically accomplished, and aspiring to be high earners, because thats what is needed to support the raising of children.


Pressures exist on both sides, because that's what survival entails. Society has just dressed it up so that made it appears more sophisticated and less overt.

Ultimately, life's purpose is to ensure that it continues. Think of it like that and everything makes sense.


However the roles for men and women in raising the next generation are different, and complementary. This is a principle that is apparrant throughout nature beyond humanity

The difference between men and feminists is that men mostly accept and welcome their role. Well, they used to.

Feminists talk about choice, but what they are saying is, we'll have the kids if and we when we want, on our own or with a man if we choose so..but then want tax-payer support for IVF when they've left it to late... then if they have them, they want to paid for having them, they then want governments and tax payers and private business to pay for the cost of caring for the kid after they're born so they can "have a career", over and above the costs of educating and keeping them healthy.

And then if a mother so chooses, out goes the father. She then dictates what if any relationship he can have with his children, she demands the bulk of joint property.

You talk of freeing women -and men from these expectations as being the true aim of feminism. Well that aim is at odds with a system for raising the next generation that seems to be natural. What we are then left with is endless cycle of problems to fix, all pushing the responsibility of raising kids onto someone else. The buck has to stop somewhere!

I feel sorry for today's young men-my son will be 18 in a few months. Why would anyone sign up to get fucked over in every aspect of their lives: emotional, financial, career, parenting. I am glad these discussions are happening. Men are finally waking up to it all, they're organising and they're learning to "play the game".

The pendulum has swung way too far and is due for correction.

Edited by stefcep: 5/12/2013 11:28:51 PM

=d>

Scoll, you claimed women are equally capable when given equal opportunities in one of your posts.

This is just wrong, men are stronger than women and are better suited to physical work. It is an unavoidable fact. Women probably are also better at other things. This does not mean that women are any less than men, it just means they are less suited to those jobs. Just like a 7 foot person is more suited to be a basketball player than a 5 foot person who would be more suited to being a jockey. Women cannot be everything a man can be and men cannot be everything a women can be.

Scoll, you're a spud. You start off in a thread talking about why men are avoiding marriage and make it about feminism and now you've made it about consensual sex.

Sounds about par for a feminist argument.

And don't forget every other country where the mother defaults to primary carer in a ridiculously high percentage of cases. A recent survey in the US found that the father won primary custody in just 10% of cases.

R u fucking kidding me?



Please don't minimise rape thank you. The whole intoxicated thing is more about individuals getting others drunk just so that they can have sex with them, or using the fact that they're drunk to take advantage of them doing things they wouldn't if they were sober. You can definitely give consent when you're drunk. It's probably a "murky area" because women can (and do) exploit it, claiming they were raped when they were drunk, when in reality they just regret having sex.

I hope you didn't think you were being funny when you were posting that image though 433.

Though poorly expressed, 433 has a point.

Just like women are expected to maintain a certain level of make-up in public and groom body hair, men are expected to be clean-shaven (or groom any facial hair) and keep other body hair trimmed, if not shaven.

I get more phone numbers at work when I'm cleanshaven & wearing a shirt and tie than when I'm wearing a t-shirt and jeans and have stubble, this could just be a bizarre phenomenon but I'd contend that there's a standard of grooming applied to men in the 21st century just as much as there is to women.

And as for having babies being the "womens job"...it's not like the men can do it :lol:

I don't disagree with any of that, of course men are held to certain standards too, I was more meaning that it's absolutely ridiculous for him to imply that the only expectation of women regarding looks is to shower.

There's more to hygiene than just a splash about in the shower.

Kiwi, you never know what standards 433 has ;)

Scoll, it's difficult to know where to even start. Your argument that modern feminism is about equality is simply bullshit. Most expect and demand 'equality' but as soon as something gets to hard and society refuses to give them a leg up then we (men) all become misogynistic bastards.

However telling a feminist this would also make me a misogynistic bastard...

LOL, you've given me a lecture in your first sentence, then basically reiterated my point.

:-s

The point I was making is that those things aren't considered rape, and to say they are is minimising something serious. I was also pointing out that you're an idiot to reply to Scoll's like that. "LOLOLOL I've had drunk sex before, that means I was raped omg :o " No.

And there is more to the expectation of female beauty than just hygiene.

:?

Now I've just thought of a 7th reason why men are avoiding marriage.

That's a very fine line. There's the girls who are too drunk to say no and are taken advantage of and that to be is always very rapey. But then there's the girls who get smashed, do something with someone they shouldn't, regret it and then cry rape to make it "all better" and trivialise the whole scenario.

i dunno i am 51........

does it still exist the sniff the finger secret check to see if she is clean enough to muff dive...or in this day and age you just don't go there due to STD's?????? or is it something you only do once your both all checked and safe?????

Sorry didn't read the original post if I'm honest.

Yeah, it creates a massive "girl who cried wolf" kind of problem.